The Worst Get on Top

By -
Monarchy is an interesting possible solution to Hayek's problem of why "the worst get on top": the monarch had to make no effort to get on top except that of getting out of the birth canal. And history lends this notion some support: of course, there have been very bad monarchs, but I don't think the worst of them approach Hitler, Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot.

Sortition, of course, is another possible solution.

Just wishing that "Everyone will stay at the bottom and so no one will be on top!" on the other hand, is not much of solution.

Comments

  1. Samson Corwell1:20 AM

    Did Hayek ever give any possible explanations for why the scum rises to the top? I'm personally a fan of representative democracy, constitutional republicanism, and presidentialism over monarchy, but I've got no love for populist despotism (something which has a rather bloody track record as you note).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah1:23 AM

      Hayek was talking especially of regimes with full central planning, but the principle extends, I think.

      I haven't looked at that chapter in a while, but I think it's pretty basic: in a struggle to see who will wield power, the ruthless have an edge

      Delete
    2. Samson Corwell3:38 PM

      The only nation that's a completely or almost completely centrally planned society that exists without many of the horrors committed by Hitler/Mao/Stalin-types is Cuba. Granted, they engage in censorship, fake trials, and a host of other abuses, but it's nothing that comes anywhere close to North Korea, the only country that is more planned than them. Cuba is authoritarian rather than totalitarian.

      Delete
  2. E. Mortimer3:29 AM

    One of the problems with monarchy is that it is not always absolutely clear who has a better claim to the throne. In the past there have been very long and protracted conflicts between several people with plausible claims to the same throne.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah8:04 AM

      Yes that is a problem. Nothing in this fallen world is perfect. But democracies also have elections in which the results are questioned: see US, 2000, Crimea, 2014, etc.

      Delete
  3. Samson Corwell3:50 PM

    Perhaps it's that for the future despot to have the drive to rise to the top requires a grand vision, something which would no doubt turn into a centrally planned society.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more